- Court: Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Land Use
- Date Filed: 02-16-2018
- Case #: 2017-108
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Opinion by Holstun
- Full Text Opinion
Petitioners appeal a county decision that grants conditional use approval for a nonfarm dwelling in an exclusive farm use (EFU) zone. The subject parcel is located in Powell Butte. The parcel is 9.32 acres in size and is not irrigated. Intervenors, Lee and Joyce Garcia, requested approval from the county to site a nonfarm dwelling on the property in. County planning staff issued a decision approving the non-farm dwelling. Petitioners appealed that decision to the Crook County Planning Commission. The planning commission affirmed the decision. Petitioner appealed to the Crook County Court. The county court affirmed the county’s approval of the intervenor’s request. This appeal followed.
On the second assignment of error, “petitioner contends that the county misconstrued and misapplied applicable law in finding that the subject property cannot be used for farm use in conjunction with other land.” Intervenors cite Epp v. Douglas County, arguing that “if size or location is not the sole basis for a finding of suitability, then whether or not the parcel can be used in conjunction with other lands is irrelevant.” LUBA states that this conclusion is incorrect. Epp held that the decision whether property can reasonably be put to farm use in conjunction with other land is not implicated where a county finds the property is generally suitable for farm use for reasons other than size or location. On remand, intervenors and the county will have another opportunity to demonstrate that the subject property is generally unsuitable for farm use based on factors other than size and location. Should this matter be pursued further by the county, LUBA remands this portion of the opinion despite petitioner’s second assignment of error being sustained. REMANDED.